Well Resident Evil 4 exists so I'm gonna have to go with that one. Infact even RE7 is pretty damn bold when you consider that it throws away everything we've known about RE for the past several years i.e. third person, big budget, variable locations and actually ends up going first person set in one small location.
You could say it went back to RE1 style in terms of scope and horror but it's still a radical departure from a series that was known for being a big budget action game franchise. Basically RE has done it twice.
Super Mario 64 and BOTW were bolder because they didn't follow any conventions.
God Of War is in fact very similar to RE4, it's a change for this series sure, but it doesn't do anything new.
God of War had a model to copy.
I think it is more of a perspective shift. The combat eventually sort of felt a bit like the other or at least like a good evolution of it.
I am not sure if I agree or not. RE4 seems like a bigger departure. I'd put BOTW and GOW in the same spot though as they feel like games that totally changed the formula while remaining the same in some way.
I'm hoping the game opens up and shows me why you think so past the 5 or so hours I've played of the game so far. Because despite the different setting and over the shoulder combat, it very much does not depart much from the original trilogy in terms of core gameplay loop. Regardless of whether it is or not as OP claims, it should be a fun ride and I'm excited to play more.
This for me. Only have put a few hours in myself but I have yet to witness the revolution. I too am not downplaying what I have experienced, but in actuality I find myself thinking how reminiscent the game actually kind of is to the older titles despite the perspective shift(arena rooms, linear hallways routes with hidden chests obscured by objects or viewpoint, environmental roadblocks to suss out). It's largely familiar to the older games that I revisited this past summer despite how advanced the tech has gotten.